A follow-up on [8249] for the benefit of those listmembers who don't
have Hegel's _Science of Logic_.
> Also see the following sections in Chapter 2 ("Real Measure") in Section
> 3 ("Measure") Book One ("The Doctrine of Being"):
> * In Section A. ("The Relation of Self-Subsistent Measures"), Sub-
> Section (a) ("The Combination of Two Measures"), especially first
> paragraph (pp. 349-350 in Miller translation ([Humanities Press]).
"Something is IMMANENTLY DETERMINED AS A MEASURE
RELATION OF QUANTA which also possess qualities and the
something is the connection of these qualities. One of them is the
*being-within-self* or *inwardness* of the something by virtue of
which it is a real being-for-self, a material thing (such as, taken
intensively, weight, or its extensive aspect, the multiplicity of *material*
parts); the other quality is the *externality* of this inwardness (the
abstract, ideal element of space). These qualities are quantitatively
determined and their correlation constitutes the qualitative nature
of the material something -- e.g. the ratio of weight to volume: specific
gravity. The volume, the ideal aspect, is not taken as unit, but
the intensive aspect, which manifests quantitatively and in comparison
with the former as an extensive magnitude, as a plurality of
independent ones, is to be taken as amount. The purely qualitative
relation of the two specific magnitudes, that is, as a ratio of powers,
has vanished, because with the self-subsistence of the material thing
immediacy has returned and in this the specific magnitude is an
ordinary quantum whose relation to the other side is likewise
determined as the ordinary exponent of a direct ratio" (capitalization
emphasis added, quotes in asterisks are emphasized as italics in
original, JL).
> * Sub-Section (b) ("Measure as a Series of Measure Relations"),
> also in Section A, especially first paragraph (1), (Ibid, pp. 351-
> 352).
"(1) If two things forming a compound body owed their respective
specific natures only to a simple qualitative determination, they
would only destroy each other when combined. But a thing which is
an IMMANENT MEASURE RELATION is self-subsistent; it is
therefore also capable of combining with another such thing. But in
being reduced to an element of this unity, it preserves itself through
the persistence of its indifferent, quantitative character and at the
same time functions as a specifying moment or a new measure
relation. Its quality is masked in the quantitative element and is
thus also indifferent towards the other measure, continuing itself in it
and in the newly formed measure. The exponent of the new
measure is itself only some quantum or other, an external
determinateness, and its indifference finds expression in the fact
that the specifically determined thing effects, in association with
other such measures, precisely similar neutralizations of the
reciprocal measure relations; it is in only one measure relation formed
by itself and another specifically determined thing that its specific
peculiarity is not expressed" (capitalization added for emphasis, JL).
-------------------------------
I would suggest, however, that to be able to fully comprehend the
above, it must be comprehended in context -- especially in the
context of the rest of Section Two ["Magnitude (Quantity)"] of
"The Doctrine of Being". But, *please* don't ask me to offer a
summary of Section Two. I'm afraid that would be too difficult
a task for me at present. In any event, we now know that the
concept of an immanent measure relation, in partial answer to
Chris's [8230], can be traced at least as far back as Hegel.
In solidarity, Jerry